>X>"li 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 >>;5^^^^ 
 
 
 ^-\>3>>>^- 
 
 >_2 
 
 J LIBRARY OF C0NG11E88. 
 
 
 
 --/ '■' 
 
 ' UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. \ 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^3 ^^>5^ >>> ^ i; 
 
 
 ^ 3, > 
 
 3 ^ J> > 
 

 ^, mi^^^'^W 
 
 
 
 
 .x^:3ir^ 
 
 -^il^!* 
 
 
 je> 3 
 
 
 
 
 3J> J 
 
 ^-^ 2> >:)j)" 
 
 ^i 
 
 -^^^^^ 3>5 
 
 
 
 
 J>^0») 
 
 yy> 
 
 0J> J») 
 
 » ^ 
 
 ^).^:;>>^' 
 
 -,^ ■ y>:>)y j» ^> :i)» >> '3 
 
 
 
 3>> >j> 
 
 
 
 
 - ► ^ -V sl^ -^'^> 3>>.i) j»lj^ j>»-.j> » :_ 
 
 £> _> j> > :» 
 
 :> » >.3>, 
 
 
 
 > > 
 
SPEECH 
 
 MR. EWING, OF OHIO 
 
 MR. BRADBURY'S RESOLUTIONS. 
 
 DELIVERED IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, TUESDAY, 
 JANUARY 7, 1851. 
 
 
 WASHINGTON: 
 
 GIDEON & CO., PRINTERS. 
 1851. 
 

8PEECH 
 
 In Senate, Tuesday, January 7, 1851. 
 
 The Senate having resumed the conaideration of the resolution in relation to removals frotn 
 office — 
 
 Mr. E WING said: 
 
 I expressed my entire willingness on Thursday last, after listening to the 
 remarks of the Senator from Indiana, (Mr. Bright,) to join the issue tendered 
 by gentlemen on the other side. And as it is impossible to adduce all the cases 
 of removal, and to give all the reasons in all the cases, I was willing to take 
 the two prominent cases selected by those gentlemen, and selected with very 
 great care and caution, and to let them stand as the test cases. On my part, 
 in behalf of the late Administration, I was willing, and am still willing, to ad- 
 mit, that if these removals, or if either one of them, was wrong, that all were 
 wrong; and I expect a like candid admission on their side, that if those which 
 they have selected as the test cases were right, that all were right; and that 
 they will give up the contest, if the position which they have taken as to these 
 their selected cases cannot be sustained. Gentlemen made their selection after 
 the lapse of much time, and evidently upon much consultation. I infer the 
 fact from their obvious accord in thrusting Gen. Lane and Col. Weller promi- 
 nently forward as the specially wronged and persecuted victims; from the 
 prompt and general rally at the instant to their defence; from the harmonious 
 agreement of many voices in denouncing these especially as cases of mere 
 naked proscription; and, finally, from the general concurrence of Senators in 
 alleging, by way of aggravation, that the gentlemen thus removed were at the 
 time on the Pacific coast. I do not know that this was the result of a caucus, 
 but there was a wondrous agreement in the assumption of fact and its presen- 
 tation in argument. 
 
 By mutual agreement, then, we will take these cases, chosen by gentlemen 
 on the other side. We will take them with all their circumstances of aggrava- 
 tion, and if I cannot prove that their removals were right and proper, nay, a 
 necessary duty on the part of the late President, then I will agree that he acted 
 upon a wrong principle, and that his removals generally were wrong. If I 
 prove that these were right, then I claim from the otlier side the admission that 
 his removals were generally right. 
 
These selections are well and judiciously and fairly made. They belong 
 each to his own separate class of officeholders; Col. Weller to those who were 
 wholly unfit for the offices to which they were appointed, incapable of discharg- 
 ing the duties, and unfit to be trusted with the funds necessary for their exe- 
 cution. (Jen. Lane belonged to a diffigrent class, that of electioneering office- 
 holders, whose violence and abuse and calumny during the Presidential can- 
 vass had been such that Gen. Taylor, when he became President, could not, 
 without sacrificing all self-respect, without sacrificing all respect for his politi- 
 cal friends, suffer them to remain in office; nay, it was such that, had they had 
 a proper sense of what was due to official propriety, they would of themselves 
 have instantly resigned their offices upon the election of General Taylor, and 
 refused to hold office under a man whom they had so depreciated and calum- 
 niated. There is, then, a peculiar fitness in the selection which gentlemen 
 have made. We may test a large number of cases from these two, of which 
 they may be considered the representatives. 
 
 I had something to say with respect to Col. Weller a few days ago, and it. 
 is not necessary that I should now repeat what I then said, nor refer to the 
 documents to which I then referred. I will merely add two particulars, to 
 which I did not deem it necessary to refer, but which, as gentlemen are hard 
 to satisfy, the occasion now calls for. 
 
 But, before proceeding to the question, I will remark, that I have not sought 
 this controversy, but have shunned it ; not, however, in fear of the result, for 
 I knew at the commencement how it must end ; but from an unfeigned reluct- 
 ance to engage in a discussion involving personal character and personal con- 
 duct. Hence it is that I have said as little as I could possibly say, without 
 doing injustice to General Taylor's Administration, that would injure the char- 
 acter or wound the feelings of either. If I touch them now with a less gentle 
 hand, they must thank their friends, who persisted in thrusting them in our 
 faces. But, in order to take up the first branch of my subject properly, I must 
 refer to the debate of the 12th of December, in which the Senator from Michi- 
 gan took a part. That Senator made an inquiry of me during that debate in 
 these words : " But will the honorable Senator tell me that Col. Weller would 
 have been removed if he had been a Whig ?" 
 
 I replied, in answer to the question of the honorable Senator from Michigan, 
 as follows : 
 
 ■ And I can say to the honorable Senator from Michigan, (Mr. Cass,) in reply to his inquiry, 
 that had Col. Weller been a Whig, and had my information concerning him been what it was 
 and from the same reliable sources, I would have unhesitatingly advised his removal." 
 
 I had hoped that my reply would have been perfectly satisfactory to the 
 Senator, and especially after the remarks made by me the other day. 
 
 Mr. Cass. If the Senator from Ohio will allow me, I will state that my in- 
 
quiry was in allusion to the ground of removal which he had then stated, which 
 was with respect to the accounts of Col. Weller. He had not then referred 
 to the character of Col. Weller, and my remark had no reference to that. 
 
 Mj. EwiNG. I hoped that the Senator would have been satisfied with my 
 reply, knowing, as I was convinced he did, that there were other charges of 
 grave import against Col. Weller, and knowing also,, as I supposed he did, that 
 I withheld them from an unwillingness, unless absolutely compelled by the 
 force of circumstances, to speak here of the defects and vices of men. But 
 when next the Senator spoke, he saw fit to consider me as having stated spe- 
 cifically all I knew of Col. Weller, and all the facts which influenced the Pre- 
 sident to remove him ; and, giving me credit for good intentions, he expressed 
 himself incredulous of my assertion, that I would have advised the removal of 
 Colonel Weller had he been a Whig. And in these remarks the Senator from 
 Michigan took particular pains to confine the issue to what I never made an 
 issue, which was, whether Colonel Weller was removed under and by the 
 operations of a particular act of Congress. Well, I agree that he was not. I 
 never said that he was, nor intimated any such thing. But the Senator said, 
 when he last addressed the Senate on the subject, that he would not be "driven 
 from his point." That is, the Senator was determined to confine the cause of 
 removal to the operation of that particular law which I did not name, and 
 which had nothing to do with it. I have no issue with the honorable Senator; 
 he took his ground entirely out of my line of march, and it would have been 
 most unreasonable for me to go quite out of my way to drive him from a posi- 
 tion which he had a perfect right to occupy, and which interfered not at ail 
 with mine. 
 
 As the Senator is not satisfied with the evidence already adduced, I will now 
 offer one other item, and hope it will be sufficient. It is a certified copy of 
 the report of a master in chancery, who was appointed by the court of common 
 pleas of Butler county to inquire into the defalcation of Colonel Weller and two 
 other individuals who were entrusted with a public fund belonging to that 
 county. I will read a short extract from that report, premising, however, that 
 all the commissioners were good Democrats, and Mr. McBride, the master in 
 chancery, a Democrat also, and a personal friend of Colonel Weller. The 
 money entrusted to these persons was the part of the surplus fund belonging 
 to that county, a large amount of which Colonel Weller had converted to his 
 own use, and failed to account for. This fact I well knew when Colonel Wel- 
 ler was removed ; and the Senator from Michigan must have known that I 
 knew and referred to it when I told him, the other day, that from the facts 
 within my knowledge I would have advised the removal of Colonel Weller 
 had he been a Whig. The extract is as follows : 
 
 " The amounts due said funds by other debtors than said defendants, whose notes, bonds, 
 
and mortgages have been put into my possession, may be found in tabular statement herewith 
 filed, (marked B,) amounting in all to the sum of $30,733 46, leaving in the hands of the de- 
 fendants, and to be acccounted for by them, the sum of $24,050 74. Of this sum I find, accord- 
 ing to notes and receipts on file, that James H . Ward owes the sum of $4,687 83, (for par- 
 ticulars as to dates and accounts, see his account on file marked C,) and that Lowen R. Cooch, 
 according to similar vouchers and evidence on file, owes of this sum the amount of $2,429 87» 
 received at times and ia amounts as specified in his account on file, (marked D,) leaving to be 
 accounted for by John B. Weller, the other defendant, and agent of the commissioners, the 
 sum of $16,933 06. At what time or times, or in what amounts, this sum was received by iVIr. 
 Weller, or at what time he became chargeable therewith, I have not been able to ascertain." 
 
 Thus it appears, Mr. President, that Colonel Weller was a defaulter to his 
 own county at the time of his appointment in a large amount, and it was a fact 
 known to me at the time of his removal — not then by the certified report of 
 the master, but by undoubted information. And it is proper to add, that he 
 was known to be habitually intemperate. Nobody denies this — nobody doubts 
 it. The duty he was to discharge was exceedingly important, as he had the 
 command oif men and the control of a large sum of money. There was placed 
 in his hands, immediately upon his appointment, upwards of $33,000 of the 
 public money. He gave no bond — he was not required to give any. He left 
 the United States with this money while the suit was pending, after the mat- 
 ter was referred to the master, and before his report was made, and he failed 
 to render an account or present a statement to the commissioner, but left him 
 to find out the date and amount of his defalcation as he best could. He sailed 
 for Panama, as I showed the other day, more than a month before the duties 
 of his commission required him, and the only object that I can conjecture he 
 had in view was to be out of the United States before the new Administration 
 should come into power. Certainly he did not forward the business of his 
 commission by going so hastily, for he was further from the place of his desti- 
 nation, in point of time, at the end of the month, at Panama, than he would have 
 been in New York the same day. He could have obtained transportation from 
 New York for himself and his party, while he had provided none, and could 
 obtain none, from Panama. And from the accounts we had of his conduct 
 while lingering there, any one must have been satisfied that he was wholly 
 unfit to be entrusted with the command of men or the expenditure of public 
 money. Now, I say that, had Colonel Weller been a political partisan con- 
 nected with me, no matter how closely, and had that office been in my depart- 
 ment, I should most unhesitatingly have advised hie removal, and would have 
 felt it inexcusable to trust so large an amount of the public money in his hands. 
 The Senator from Michigan may be incredulous yet, but I venture to assert 
 that, had it been his own private funds which were in the hands of Colonel 
 Weller, he would have taken them out, if he could get them, immediately. 
 What he would have done with regard to public funds of which he had the 
 
care, it is for him and not for me to determine. But I have no doubt that had 
 he occupied the Executive chair he would have removed Colonel Weller from 
 that situation, however else he might have bestowed him. 
 
 But further to remove doubts from the mind of the Senator from Michigan, 
 I must be permitted to say, that the very case once occurred, that I did re- 
 move, or rather advise the removal of a Whig, who was in every way qualified 
 for his office except in the one particular, merely because I had ascertained he 
 was a defaulter in his own State. I advised his removal, and Gen. Taylor re- 
 moved him. I do not wish to name, nor is it necessary that I should name, 
 the individual. I will, however, inform the Senator from Michigan, privately, 
 of the person and the office, if he desires it. 
 
 So much, Mr. President, for Col. Weller. I do not wish to dwell upon his 
 case any longer, or ever return to it again, unless the Senator from Michigan 
 still thinks that my statement and asseveration needs further support. If he 
 does, I will give it to him in public or in private, as he may desire. 
 
 Mr. Cass. I will make my statement after you have done. 
 
 Mr. EwiNG. I will now say one word as to this case of ^^naked proscription 
 for opiniori's sake;^^ for that this removal has been pronounced by a half a 
 dozen voices here. Col. Weller, a Democrat, wholly without qualifications, 
 not trustworthy, not fit for the office, was removed from it, and Col. Fremont, 
 another Democrat, most highly qualified, in every respect trustworthy, of per- 
 fect fitness and capacity for the duties of the office, was appointed in his place. 
 This is the proscription for opinion's sake so eloquently denounced by gentle- 
 men on the other side of the chamber. 
 
 Perhaps I ought to explain one thing further, however, before I leave this 
 case. Col. Weller was, according to well settled usage, clearly entitled to an 
 office from the Democratic party. The previous Administrations here had 
 always given the defeated candidate for Governor of Ohio some office under 
 the Federal Government, and of course Col. Weller must have some one. But 
 my point is, and I do not mean to be driven from it, that this was not the 
 proper office. They selected badly — a foreign mission, being the just reward 
 for the services of the candidate, and the usual salvo for his feelings, wounded 
 by defeat. 
 
 Before proceeding to the case of Gen. Lane, I will consider for a momeat 
 an item of Executive history, kindly furnished to me by the Senator from In- 
 diana. He says : 
 
 " I will read a letter which I have in my possession, first premising that, at the time Gen. 
 Lane was Governor of Oregon, the duties of Governors of Territories, Indian agents, and simi- 
 lar officers were under the supervision of the Department of the Interior. There had been 
 somewhat of a conflict between that Department and the Department of State as to which was 
 entitled to the jurisdiction of these officers. I understand that latterly it has been settled in 
 
favor of the Department of State, and therefore that became the proper place to which I should 
 apply for information." 
 
 Now, this is all new information to me— pcntirely so, I never heard or sus- 
 pected that there was the slightest question between those two Departments 
 as to jurisdiction. The Department of State had jurisdiction over the Territo- 
 rial officers proper. The Department of the Interior over the Superintendent 
 of Indian Affairs. The Governor of Oregon performed the double duty. He 
 was the Governor and was ex officio Superintendent of Indian Affairs. His 
 office of Governor was within, and he was appointed and removed through, the 
 State Department. The Department of the Interior had nothing to do with it, 
 except to attend and eee to the discharge of his duties as superintendent. 
 Hence it is that everything which related to the Indian affairs came to the De- 
 partment of the Interior, and all that related to his other duties to the Depart- 
 ment of State. I do not know where the Senator got his information — from 
 what letter- writer, or in what newspaper he found it; but he stated it here as a 
 matter of history, of which he had beconie well informed. There is a great 
 deal of history which gets abroad with just as much foundation as that. Owing 
 to the fact that Gen. Lane was not from my State, and not in my Department, I 
 did not treasure up in my mind the particulars of his removal, the mere pass- 
 ing events of a day, but I remembered in a very general manner his neglect 
 of duty as Superintendent of Indian Affairs, and the complaints made against 
 him in that capacity, and on the spur of the moment I stated them as I remem- 
 bered them; and I find, on examination, that my memory has not misled me. 
 I said : 
 
 '•' As to Governor Lane, no report was made by him to the Department for a very long time 
 after his appointment. Great complaints were made against him from the Territory of Oregon, 
 and from the most authentic and reliable sources ; those which the Executive ought to respect." 
 
 As a matter of fact and memory at the moment, I said that this was the case 
 — not that he was removed on this ground; for, having nothing to do with his 
 removal, I could not answer for its cause, any further than I have said. 
 Knowing by whom it was done, I knew it was rightfully done. 
 
 Now, with respect to the first of the objections I stated against Governor 
 Lane — namely, that he neglected to report as Superintendent of Indian Affairs 
 — the Senator from Indiana, not now present, (Mr. Bright,) offered as an 
 apology or explanation that Gen. Lane was appointed by telegraphic despatch, 
 and that he immediately set out, making a toilsome journey over an inhospita- 
 ble region, and did not reach Oregon until January or February. Well, these 
 are all truths; but his first report does not bear date until October, and Gen. 
 Lane knew perfectly well that it was necessary for the Department to receive 
 hi< report earlier than that, in order to be able to make their report to Congress 
 
as to the condition of the Indian tribes in Oregon, and to recommend to that 
 body what was necessary to be done for the benefit of the Indians and of our 
 own people. 
 
 Mr. Whitcomb. If the Senator will allow me, I merely wish to state that 
 Governor Lane arrived in Oregon on the 3d of March, if my information is 
 correct. 
 
 Mr. EwiNG. Very well; I could not remember exactly. He arrived there 
 on the 3d of March, and he made his report in October. Now, he knew per- 
 fectly well that the necessities of the Department required that as much infor- 
 mation of the actual condition of affairs in Oregon as could be got, should be 
 presented to the Department as early as possible. Had this been an Adminis- 
 tration which he was inclined to favor, does any man believe he would have 
 withheld his report till October, when it could not reach the Department till it 
 was too late to have it embraced in the report made to Congress? Was he, in 
 this, prompt and diligent in the discharge of his official duties ? 
 
 I can give an example of what can be done by an officer who is on speaking 
 terms with the Administration whom he serves. The new Superintendent, of 
 Indian Affairs (Mr. Dart) reached Oregon on the 26th of September, and on 
 the 24th of October, twenty-eight days after his arrival, he forwarded to the 
 Department a report, and a very satisfactory one, as far as he could go, and he 
 followed it up with the reports as fast as he had been able to get information. 
 This man is intent on doing his duty. 
 
 Now, I felt it to be a great wrong on the part of Gen. Lane, and I felt that 
 the Department wanted a superintendent there who would attend to his duty, 
 and give the information which was desired. The honorable Senator from 
 Indiana said that Gen. Lane had not time to go all over the Territory and find 
 out all about the Indians; that it was a great Territory, and he could not do it 
 in such brief time as I seemed to require. True; but he had time to give the 
 information respecting the Indians so far as they came immediately in contact 
 with the whites, and under his own personal observation — so far, indeed, as to 
 show what was necessary to keep the two races, as far as practicable, separate, 
 and to enable them to get on peaceably with each other. This he could have 
 done within two or three months after reaching Oregon, and he ought to have 
 done it. 
 
 The Senator from Indiana says that the law did not require him to nrake a 
 report at any specified time or times. True, the law does not say that he 
 should make a report within three or five months; and I suppose he stood upon 
 the law, and was disposed to do no more than its strict letter required of him. 
 If so, and if he was right, the office is useless. The law does not and cannot 
 point out the exact duties to be performed in time and manner. 
 
 This general fact I mentioned, and I stated it the other day from memory; 
 
10 
 
 and I remembered, too, that there had been complaints against General Lane 
 by individuals from Oregon, who were entitled to credit, which I designated 
 as the most reliable sources. I know that the Senator from Indiana says, with 
 respect to the alleged complaints against General Lane, that he has searched 
 the Department and can find nothing of the kind. He goes into the curious 
 exposition of the imaginary contest between the Departments for power and 
 patronage, by way of showing that he had found the proper place to make 
 search for papers, if there were any, and that he had found nothing. Where 
 he searched, in the State Department, he could of course find nothing, and he 
 certainly ought to have known it. It was matter that belonged to the Indian 
 bureau of the Home Department, and he had but to go there and find it. 
 
 Mr. Whitcomb. That is the very place to which I did go. 
 
 Mr. EwiNG. I referred to the Senator from Indiana, not now in his seat, 
 (Mr. Bright,) who says that he searched in the Department of State and 
 found nothing. He was truly fortunate, for, if he had found something, per- 
 haps it might have interfered with the beauty and perfection of his speech; 
 especially that part of it in which he gives vent to his virtuous indignation for 
 my unfounded aspersions of the official character of General Lane. The Sen- 
 ator saw fit to say he wished it understood that the statements made by me 
 with respect to those complaints rested on the authority of my assertion alone. 
 
 Well, suppose it did rest there; is not the statement of a Senator in his place 
 sufficient authority for a fact within his knowledge? It used to be so when I 
 was a member of this body some years ago. The Senator from Indiana is bet- 
 ter able than I am to determine how it is now. But that Senator cannot have 
 bis wish; the fact does not rest on the statement of the Senator from Ohio, but 
 is also sustained by a document which I have before me. The Senator de- 
 mands, however, specifications, and he has a right to them. He requires me 
 to designate what were these complaints, and I will do it. The first charge 
 was that General Lane did not exert himself as he might and ought to have 
 done to separate the Indians from the white population, and to prevent them 
 from camping in the towns, where they became, from their gross habits, offen- 
 sive to decency. Whether this charge be true or false I know not, but it was 
 vouched by the Delegate from Oregon in two letters, which I now have before 
 me, subject to the inspection of the Senator from Indiana, whenever he chooses 
 to examine them. The first is as follows: 
 
 •'Washington, February 6, 1850. 
 
 " Sir ; This morning I had a conyersation with Mr. Brown, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 
 
 relative to the Indians located in Linn city by Governor Lane, and concerning which I had an 
 
 interview with you last night. He, like yourself, heartily concurs in their removal from the 
 
 limits of the town. He said it would be proper that it should be stated in the order to the 
 
11 
 
 Governor that the removal was in no way to affect any title said Indians might have to the 
 lands. To this I very willingly consented. Now, the town there was laid off out of a part of 
 two claims, the Linn city part by Robert Moore, and the Multnoma city part by Hugh Burns. 
 I am aware that the Indians will not be removed unless the order is peremptory and unequivocal- 
 I have to desire you, therefore, to cause an order to be issued to Joseph Lane, Governor of 
 Oregon Territory, or to his successor in said office, or whoever may be discharging the official 
 duties of Governor and Superintendent of Indian Affairs when said order shall reach the seat of 
 government of said Territory, to cause all Indians, now camping or living within the towns of 
 Linn city or Multnoma city, as laid off in lots by Robert Moore and Hugh Burns, in Oregon 
 Territory, at the Falls of the Willamette river, to be removed outside the limits of said towns, 
 and not to allow the same to return within said limits for the purpose of camping and dwelling. 
 
 " I have been thus specific because I believe your order should be so to the letter to ensure 
 obedience. I should have added, provided the order and removal consequent thereon shall in 
 no way affect any title which said Indians may have to the lands included within the limits of 
 said towns. 
 
 "Let me assure you, sir, that such an order will be greeted by the people of said towns or 
 villages with gratitude, and the modesty of our women not a little relieved by its prompt execu- 
 tion. 
 
 "I would suggest that your order go as soon as possible, and if you wili cause me to be 
 furnished with a duplicate, that I may inform the people, in case the order should not be obeyed^ 
 that the Department has desired otherwise, you will oblige me. 
 
 " I have the honor to be, sir, with high consideration, yours, truly, 
 
 " SAM. R. THURSTON. 
 
 " Hon. Thomas Ewing, Secretary of the Interior.'''' 
 
 The second letter I will not read. It refers to and enforces the same 
 charges. 
 
 Now, I wish it understood that I affirm nothing and know nothing of the 
 facts stated in these letters, except that I know they come from the Delegate 
 from Oregon, who is of course entitled to attention and respect in all things 
 which he states touching the interests of the people of that Territory. Whether 
 he represents the case truly or not, I cannot determine, and I assume no re- 
 sponsibility concerning it. 
 
 The next charge is, that General Lane not only did not prevent the British 
 Hudson Bay Company from keeping up trading establishments in the Indian 
 territory of the United States in Oregon, but that he encouraged, and patron- 
 ized, and maintained them there, to the injury of the rights of American citi- 
 zens. One paper goes further, and says that he purchased, or directed to be 
 purchased, from the Hudson's Bay Company, blankets in considerable quan- 
 tity, and then suffered that company to distribute them as presents from them- 
 selves to the Indians. I cannot say that this is true; but it is the charge, pre- 
 sented by the Delegate from Oregon, certified to and sustained by the Chief 
 Justice of Oregon, both Democrats, and both supposed to be responsible men. 
 These charges come, then, as I said, from authentic and reliable sources. 
 
 Mr. Dodge, of Iowa. Will the Senator from Ohio allow me to make an 
 inquiry } 
 
12 
 
 Mr. EwiNG. Yes, sir, I yield to an inquir3\ 
 
 Mr. Dodge. Were these charges, which the Senator asserts were made, 
 "before the removal of General Lane? 
 
 Mr. EwiNG. They were not, and I did not say they were — nothing of that 
 ■kind. Being called on suddenly, the other day, touching the official conduct 
 of General Lane, I threw out my impressions at the moment as to what had 
 been objected against him, without stating the time when the charges were 
 made. These charges, however, were made orally long before the papers 
 which I have produced bear date; for I had frequent conversations with the 
 Delegate on the subject, and he pressed the alleged grievances of his people 
 strongly upon me long before he presented them in writing. I produce them 
 jQOW only to sustain my own statement of fact, indirectly questioned by the 
 Senator from Indiana, (Mr. Bright;) not to sustain the removal of Governor 
 Lane, which, as I find on examination, rests on other and very different 
 grounds. 
 
 It is but fair that I should say that the specifications in the last charge, 
 namely, that the blankets purchased of the Hudson's Bay Company for the In- 
 dians W'ere distributed by the servants of that company as presents from them, 
 upon investigation, proves to be unfounded. I have looked at the evidence 
 taken upon the spot, which disproves it. But the general cAarg-e which I have 
 referred to above is sustained — namely, that he suffered the Hudson's Bay 
 Company to trade with the Indians in Oregon; and it is further shown, by 
 Governor Lane's own vouchers, that he bought from houses of that company, 
 at some five or six places in the Territory, sundry articles of merchandise for 
 the Indians. When the new superintendent reached Oregon in September, 
 1850, he found the Hudson's Bay Company still trading, and claiming a right 
 to trade, there with the Indians, as they pretended, under treaty stipulations. 
 Now, it is clear that the treaty gives them no such right; they are protected 
 by it in their property, but not permitted to become or continue to be Indian 
 traders. They are allowed to navigate the Columbia river and its branches 
 from the 49th degree of latitude to its mouth, and to pass its rapids by the 
 usual portages; but they are not authorized to go beyond that; and no foreigner 
 has a right to enter the Indian territory to trade under any circumstances. No 
 one, not even an American citizen, has a right to do it without a license from 
 the Superintendent of Indian Affairs. 
 
 The charge against him of allowing the British Hudson Bay Company to 
 trade in the Indian territory is substantiated; and I think I have said enough 
 to satisfy the Senator from Indiana himself, when he shall read my remarks, 
 and the documents which I have quoted, that he could not possibly be gratified 
 in his very reasonable wish that the public should understand that this charge 
 rested upon my statement alone. I submit whether it is not sustained by quite 
 as good vouchers as I gave the Senate to understand I had for it. 
 
13 
 
 I will now refer, Mr. President, to another branch of the subject. The other 
 day, when this resolution was under discussion, my friend from North Carolina 
 (Mr. Mangum) said he had an impression on his mind, derived from the public 
 prints, that not only was there a publication made by General Lane which re- 
 flected upon General Taylor's personal honor, but which went to the extent of 
 an impeachment of his veracity as a man; and that, if so. Governor Lane ought 
 to have been removed. To these remarks the Senator from Indiana, not now 
 in his place, (Mr. Bright,) replied: 
 
 " I did not misunderstand the honorable Senator from North Carolina. I did not say that he 
 asserted that Gen. Lane had made such publication, or that he uttered such declaration; but hy-^ 
 pothetically, that if Gen. Lane had done so he ought to have been removed. I concur with 
 him in that opinion, unless he stated the truth." 
 
 Now, on full proof being made, first, that Gen. Lane made a publication im- 
 peaching the veracity of Gen. Taylor; and, secondly, that such publication was 
 not true, the Senator from Indiana, instead of condemning, joins with us in 
 sustaining the removal of Gen. Lane, and will agree that his removal was not 
 ^^proscription'^ on the part of Gen. Taylor, but the performance of a duty. 
 Those two propositions I will now proceed to establish. . I will, as briefly and 
 as hastily as possible, give the facts necessary to sustain them; and, having^ 
 done so, I shall leave Gen. Lane, and dismiss this branch of the case. 
 
 In the first place I am to inquire, did Gen. Lane make a publication which 
 impeached the veracity of Gen. Taylor? I will read a few extracts published 
 during the electioneering contest of 1848, after Gen. Lane was appointed to 
 ofiice, and a few days before he set out for Oregon, which will satisfy every 
 man that he did not only insinuate an impeachment of Gen. Taylor's veracity, 
 but that he impeached it directly, and in the grossest terms: 
 
 FIRST EXTRACT. 
 
 "To THE PUBLIC. — It has become necessary that I shoul^ appear before the public and ask 
 its candid attention to a subject of vital importance to Indiana, and to the brave troops which 
 she sent into the field during the war with Mexico. Interested partisans in this State (and I re- 
 gret that it is so) appear resolved upon disgi-acing; themselves and the State of their nativity or 
 adoption by the publication of glaring falsehoods and statements, wholly unfounded in fact, put 
 forth in the attempt to secure a mere partisan triumph. I allude to the slanders which, from time ■ 
 to time, have been peiyetraied by different persons, both in official documents and othencise, upon the 
 second Indiana regiment, relative to their conduct in the battle of Buena Vista." 
 
 SECOND EXTRACT. 
 
 " Gen. Taylor, in his report of that battle, was mistaken as to the facts, and has made state- 
 ments wholly at variance with them, particularly with regard to the conduct of that regiment. 
 If he had hastened to repair the injury thus inflicted as soon as he became apprized of it, the 
 present statement from myself would not have been necessary. But, instead of correcting ichai 
 
14 
 
 he has stated, he persists in repeatiiig it in the most offensive manner, and that, too, in the face of facts 
 too numerous and too well authenticated to be denied or evaded.''' 
 
 THIRD EXTRACT. 
 
 " There are two material facts known to every one upon that field, knotcn to Gen. Taylor when 
 he made his report, and which are embodied in my report, which facts Gen. Taylor does not even 
 allude to, to wit : First, that the regiment immediately rallied, and next that they fought all 
 day. Read again those sentences in the above extracts and contrast them. Gen. Taylor says 
 they could not be rallied, and took no further part in the action, except a handfal of men who ral- 
 lied under the gallant Col. Bowles. This statement is not Mte." 
 
 FOURTH EXTRACT. 
 
 " I will give his exact language. Extract from his letter to G. G. Dunn, dated 
 
 "'Baton Rouge, March 2i, 1848- 
 
 " 'My confidence in the second regiment, officers and men, was still maintained after the oc' 
 
 currences of the 23d ; for I remembered that in all armies the best and most experienced troops 
 
 have at times been most unaccountably subject and yielded to panic, by no means compromising 
 
 their reputation for bravery.' 
 
 " Extract from his letter to Defrees, dated 
 
 '"Baton Rovgz, March 3, 1848. 
 
 " 'In all armies the best and most experienced troops have been at times subject to panics 
 under a murderous fire of an enemy, which are inexplicable. Such, it was most probable, may 
 have been the case at the time in question.' 
 
 " This charge of cowardice, thus repeated again and again, I know to be false, and so does euery 
 man who has carefully and without prejudice examined the case. 
 
 " General Taylor further says that he had not lost his confidence in that regiment, and in- 
 tended to place them in action the next day. / let this pass for lohat it is worth. 
 
 " General Taylor asserts that nothing has transpired since he made his report, nor has any 
 statement been made to him in an official shape, which affects its accuracy. 
 
 " The first of these assertions I have shown to be utterly devoid of <rnt/i." 
 
 I suppose I might be excused from commenting upon these extracts further 
 than to say that they convey very truly the temper and character of the publi- 
 cation. It is from beginning to end a studied and labored attack upon the ve- 
 racity of Gen. Taylor. In every paragraph which I have quoted there is at 
 least an indirect accusation of falsehood; in three of them the charge is direct- 
 In the first, he charges Gen. Taylor with slandering the Indiana militia in an 
 official document; for that the first paragraph refers to him is made clear by the 
 second; and Gen. Lane understood well enough that there could be no slander 
 in an olficial paper unless it were maliciously false. In the beginning of the 
 second extract he softens down the phrase, and says that Gen. Taylor ''was 
 mistaken as to the facts, and made a report wholly at variance with them;'''' but, 
 as if he repented of the use of a mitigating phrase, and was eager to retract it, 
 he adds, "if he had hastened to repair the injury thus inflicted as soon as he 
 became apprized of it, the present statement from myself would not have been 
 necessary. But, instead of correcting what he had stated, he persists in repeat- 
 
15 
 
 tng it in the most offensive manner, and that too in the face of facts too numerous 
 and too well authenticated to be denied or evaded.'*'' 
 
 The amount of this passage is that Gen. Taylor made, by nistake, a report 
 doing great injustice to the Indiana regiment; he was mistaken as to the facts, 
 and made a report wholly at variance with them. His report was proved to be 
 erroneous by the most indisputable evidence, but he not only refused to cor- 
 rect it, but persisted in repeating it in the most offensive manner, after he knew it 
 was false; that is to say, Gen. Taylor repeated a falsehood after he knew it to 
 be false, slandering the reputation of a body of brave men who fought with him 
 at the battle of Buena Vista, and helped him to achieve that crowning act of 
 his military fame. This is the charge — a wilful falsehood to blast the military 
 reputation of these men. 
 
 The third extract denies that Gen. Taylor was ever mistaken at all, but 
 avers that he made the alleged false report knowing it to be false. He says: 
 ''There are two material facts known to every one upon the field, knovm to 
 Gen. Taylor when he made his report, first, that the regiment immediately ral- 
 lied; and, next, that they fought all day." Gen. Taylor says, '■^they could not 
 be rallied, and took no further part in the action, except a handful of men who 
 rallied under the gallant Col. Bowles. ''This statement is not true." 
 
 This allegation in substance is, that Gen. Taylor, when he made his report, 
 knew that the second Indiana regiment rallied and fought all day; that he states 
 in his report that they could not be rallied, and took no further part in the action. 
 Reduced to its most brief and direct expression, the charge here is, that Gen. 
 Taylor stated a falsehood in his report, knowing it to be false in two important 
 particulars, affecting the military reputation of the second Indiana regiment. 
 
 I need adduce no further proof that Gen. Lane not only insinuated, but that 
 he made a direct charge of malicious falsehood against Gen. Taylor. I am 
 ashamed to sum up the substance of this infamous and detestable publication. 
 I would not suffer it to pass my lips for a moment, though I state it only to 
 confute the iibel and to confound the libeller, but that I know every one who 
 hears me will, upon the mere statement, instantly pronounce the accusation 
 false. 
 
 In the fourth extract it will be observed that Gen. Lane refers to, and in 
 part copies, two letters from Gen. Taylor, both to the same import, in which, 
 speaking of the second Indiana regiment, Gen. Taylor says that his confidence 
 in them was still maintained; and that "in all armies the best and most expe- 
 rienced troops have been at times subject to panics, under a murderous fire of 
 an enemy, which are inexplicable;" and that such, it is most probable, may 
 have been the case with the troops in question. 
 
 In commenting upon the expression of continued confidence in these troops 
 
16 
 
 by Gen. Taylor, and his apology for what he considered rather their misfortune 
 than fault, Gen. Laae says: 
 
 " This accusation of cowardice, Ihtts repeated again and again, I know to be false." 
 
 This quotation of Gen. Taylor's letters, and the comment upon them, shows 
 how little of truth and fairness there is in Gen. Lane's publication. "This 
 charge of cowardice, thus repeated again and again!^' Why, there is no charge 
 of cowardice, much less a repetition of a charge of cowardice, in the letters 
 copied. What are we to think of a man who will thus deliberately misrepre- 
 sent a paper that is before him while he writes, and which he knows will be 
 before his readers while they are reading his comments .> If his physical be at 
 all equal to his moral courage — if he could face down an enemy w'ith as much 
 coolness and resolution as he can face down the truth, he must be bold indeed. 
 But he adds in this same extract: "Gen. Taylor asserts that nothing has trans- 
 pired since he made his report, nor has any statement been made to him in an 
 official shape, which affects its accuracy. The first of these assertioiis I have 
 shown to be utterly devoid of truth. ^^ 
 
 I comment no further on these cha:rges; they are full of naked, gross accu- 
 sations of deliberate and wilful falsehood. I have now only to show that Gen. 
 Lane, in making these accusations, did not tell the truth; or, in other w-ords, 
 that his charge against Gen. Taylor was not true. Having done so, it is ad- 
 mitted in advance that the removal of Gen. Lane was right; nay, more, in the 
 words of the Senator from Indiana, he ought to have been removed. 
 
 I will now proceed to the inquiry w^hether these charges be true or false. 
 Though perhaps it may be well here to" say a few words in reply to the Senator 
 from Indiana, (Mr. Bright,) who says it would, in any event, have been mag- 
 nanimous in Gen. Taylor to have retained Gen. Lane in office — forgetting as 
 President the injury done to him as a man. This is an afterthought. If Gen. 
 Taylor ought to have removed him, as the Senator admitted, if the statement 
 of Gen. Lane were proved false, then of course he ought not to have retained 
 him in office, and the desired act of magnanimity would have been a breach of 
 official duty. And it would have been a public wrong to keep in office a false 
 man, the author of an insolent and atrocious libel, when there were true men 
 enough, of at least equal capacity, wuUing to accept the office. It would have 
 been none the more proper because the libel was directed against the President 
 himself. The officer who possesses the pardoning power is no more entitled to 
 pardon the criminal who has forged his name, than one who has taken the 
 name of an indifferent person. He might call it magnanimity to do so, but it 
 would be a breach of official duty and an abuse of power. The Senator was 
 right when he said that, if the publication of Gen. Lane was false, he ought to 
 have been removed. I hold him to the admission, and will now proceed to 
 prove it false. 
 
17 
 
 In order to meet this que;<tion fairly, and in all the aspects in which it pre- 
 sents itself, I call attention here to that part of G-^n. Lane's publication in which 
 he professes to give an extract from Gen. Taylor's report of the battle of Buena 
 Vista, and so much of his own report as relates to the conduct of the second 
 Indiana regiment in the same battle. It is as follows: 
 
 Extract from General Taylor''s report of the battle of Buena Vista, dated Agua J\ueva, March 
 
 6th, 1847. 
 
 "The 2d Indiana and 2d Illinois regiments formed this part of our line, (the left,) the former 
 covering three pieces of light artillery, under the order of Captain O'Brien, Brigadier General 
 Lane being in the immediate command. In order to bring his men within effective range, Gen. 
 Lane ordered the artillery and 2d Indiana regiment forward- The artillery advanced within 
 musket range of a heavy body of Mexican infantry, and served against it with great effect, but 
 without being able to check its advance. The infantry ordered to iis support having fallen back 
 in disorder, being exposed, as well as the battery, not only to a severe fire of small arms trom 
 the front, but also to a murderous cross-fire of grape and canister from a Mexican battery on 
 the left. Captain O'Brien found it impossible to maintain his position without support, but was 
 only able to withdraw two of his pieces, all the horses and cannoniers of the third piece being 
 killed or disabled. The 2d Indiana regiment, which had fallen back as stated, could not he ral- 
 lied, and took no further part in the action, except a handful of men under its gallant Colonel, 
 Bowles, who joined the Mississippi regiment and did good service, and those fugitives who at a 
 late period of the day assisted in defending the train and depot at Buena Vista." 
 
 "My own official report of this part of the battle, and of the conduct of the 2d regi.ment 
 is as follows: 
 
 Extract from my own official report of the battle of Buena Vista, dated Bmna Vista, February 
 
 25th, 1847. 
 "I immediately put my column in motion, consisting of these eight battalion companies and 
 Lieut. O'Brien's battery of three field pieces, numbering in ail about four hundred men, to meet 
 them. The enemy, when they deployed from the ravine and appeared on the ridge, displayed' 
 a force of about four thousand infantry, supported by a large body of lancers. The infantry 
 immediately opened a most destructive fire, which was returned by my small command, both 
 infantry and artillery, in a most gallant manner for some time. I soon perceived that I was too 
 far from the enemy for my muskets to take that deadly effect which I desired, and immediately 
 sent my aide-de-canap to Lieut. O'Brien, directing him to place his battery in a more advanced 
 position, with the determination of advancing my whole line. By this movement I should not 
 only be nearer the enemy, but should also bring the company on my extreme left more com- 
 pletely into action, as the brow of a hill impeded their fire. By this time the enemy's fire of 
 musketry and the raking fire of ball and grape shot of the battery posted on my left flank had 
 become terrible, and my infantry instead of advancing, as was intended, I regret to say, retired 
 in some disorder from their position, notwithstanding my own and the severe efforts cf my offi- 
 cers to prevent them. About the same time the riflemen and cavalry on the mountain retired to 
 the plain below. The Arkansas cavalry (who had been posted by your orders in my rear at 
 the foot of the mountain, to act as circumstances might require) also left their position, the 
 whole making a retrograde movement along the plain towards the rear; at the same time ono of 
 the Illinois regiments, not under my command, but stationed some distance in the rear tn the 
 right of my position, also retired to the rear. 
 
 2 
 
18 
 
 "These troops, the most of them, immediately rallied and fought during the whole day like 
 veterans. A few of them, I regret to say, did not return to the field at all. ■» * * 
 
 "The men under my command actually discharged eighty rounds, and some ninety rounds of 
 cartridges at the 'enemy during the day.' TJie 2d regiment, under my command, which opened 
 the battle in such gallant style, deserves a passing remark. I shall attempt to make no apology 
 for tJie retreat, for it was their duty to stand and die until they received orders to retire. But I 
 desire to call your attention to one fact connected with this affair. They remained in their po- 
 sition in line, receiving the fire of three or four thousand infantry, exposed to a most destruc- 
 tive raking fire from the enemy's battery, posted within point blank shot, until they had delib- 
 erately discharged twenty rounds of cartridges ut the enemy. 
 
 "Some excuse may be found for those who retired for a few minutes, and then rallied and 
 fought during the day; but unless they hasten to retrieve their reputation, disgrace must forever 
 hang around the names of those who refused to return; and I regret to say there were a few from 
 nearly every volunteer corps engaged." 
 
 "Here is all that is said in relation tt» the conduct of the 2d Indiana regiment in that battle, 
 either by Gen. Taylor or myself^" 
 
 The extract Iroin General Taylor's report is set forth truly by General Lane 
 in his publication. In speaking ol" this part of the battle, General Taylor says: 
 " In order to bring his men within effective range, General Lane ordered the 
 artillery and second Indiana regiment forward." In the actual report made by 
 General Lane to General Taylor on the •25th of February, 1847, he says : 
 *' My infantry, instead of advancing, as was ordered, I regret to say, retired 
 in some disorder." But in the copy given by General Lane in his publication, 
 in which he attacks the veracity of General Taylor, he changes the word, and 
 instead of " ordered,^'' the word in his report, he inserts " intended,'''' making 
 the passage read, " My infantry, instead of advancing, as was intended, I 
 regret to say, retired," &.c. Here General Lane adduces against General Tay- 
 lor record evidence — the coj^y of a public document : he certifies to the truth 
 of it, and he copies it false!}'. This falsification of the passage is in an im- 
 portant particular. If General Lane did not report that his men were ordered 
 to advance, and General Taylor had reported that they were, it would indeed 
 have been a departure from the truth as it was before him, unless some other 
 officer having command of those troops so reported to him. Now, why this 
 alteration of the record ? The answer is easy. It would convict General 
 Taylor, on mere inspection, of a false statement, to the prejudice of the second 
 Indiana regiment. This was not a word which General Lane could have in- 
 serted by mistake. Hi> mind had been and was upon the very word. He changed 
 ordered for intended, in a supplemental report, made long after the report of 
 February •2oth, which he pretends to copy, and long after General Taylor 
 had despatched his report to Washington. 
 
 This falsification of the report is not in a matter which relates to property. 
 If it had been, and the written paper evidencing the right of a party had been 
 so altered to his injury, it would have been a high crime; but here it amounts 
 
to nothing, for it is only the reputation of a victorious General that it is intend 
 ed to sacrifice. If in a judicial proceeding General Lane had sworn to the 
 truth of this copy of his record, it would have also been a high crime ; but as 
 it is only stated upon the veracity of the man, and the honor of the soldier, it 
 is no such thing. I do not know how gentlemen on the other side will char- 
 acterize it. There was much at stake, no less than the most important otlice 
 on the face of the earth ; and as General Taylor was a candidate, and as his 
 success rested on his fair and honorable fame, which he had earned by a long 
 life in the service of his country, it was important that that fair fame should 
 be, if possible, blasted — at least General Lane appears to have thought so, and 
 acted upon that opinion ; and if it could be done by the alteration of a single 
 word in a single record, it would have been a mighty object easily achieved. 
 It was no difficult task — "it was as easy as lying." 
 
 Again : General Lane says in his publication, in the extract which I have 
 read to the Senate : 
 
 "There are two material facts, known to every one upon that field — knoicn to Gen. Taylor 
 ■when he made his report, and which arp embodied in my report — which facts General Taylor does 
 not eveM allude to, to wit: first, that the regiment immediately rallied; and next, that they fought 
 all day." 
 
 Facts embodied in his report, " that the regivient immediately rallied!''^ 
 Now, after a careful examination of that report, I can say that, to my compre- 
 hension, there is no such fact embodied in it. It is not there. There is a sin- 
 gularly confused and unintelligible passage in his report, from which I suppose 
 he intended, when he made the publication, to have such statement inferred ; 
 but it contains no such thing directly, and admits of no such inference. Here 
 is the passage : 
 
 "By this time the enemy's fire of musketry and the raking fire of ball and grape-shot of the 
 battery posted on my left flank had become terrible, and my infimtry, instead of advancing, as 
 was ORDERED, I regret to say, retired in some disorder from their position, notwithstanding my 
 own and the severe efforts of my officers to prevent them. About the same time the riflemen 
 and cavalry on the mountain retired to the plain below. The Arkansas cavalry (who had been 
 posted by your orders in my rear, at the foot of the mountain, to act as circumstances might 
 require) also left their position, the whole making a retrograde movement along the plain to- 
 wards the rear; at the same time the Illinois regiment, not under my command, but stationed 
 some distance in the rear on the right of my position, also retired to the rear. These troops, 
 the most of them, immediately rallied and fought during the whole day like veterans. A few of 
 them, I regret to say, did not return to the field at all. " 
 
 In this clause, if any where in his report, the statement that the second In- 
 diana regiment immediately rallied must be found ; but we look for it in vain. 
 And does any man suppose that if General Lane knew that this regiment ral- 
 lied and undertook to state it, he would not have told the story so that it could 
 be understood ? He tells of their retreat in plain terms ; could he not tell his 
 
20 
 
 commanding general in as plain language ihat they rallied and fought ? He 
 groups together with them in this paragraph the riflemen and cavalry on the 
 mountain — the Arkansas cavalry and the third Illinois regiment — all which he 
 says made a retrograde movement, but most of them immediately rallied and 
 fought all day. That is true enough. The riflemen and cavalry on the moun- 
 tain rallied and fought ; the Arkansas cavalry rallied and fought ; so did the 
 lUinoi.s regiment rally and fight — making most of all the troops he had so 
 grouped together ; but he does not say in that report that the second Indiana 
 reoiment rallied and fought. If he could have said so, he did great injustice 
 to that regiment that he did not say it in an intelligible manner. If he had 
 said in direct terms that most of that regiment rallied immediately, the mat- 
 ter would have been distinctly understood, and justice, whatever that might 
 be, would have been done them on the spot. But I understand from a military 
 man who was on the ground, that the Illinois regiment and the other troops 
 named by General Lane did not retreat at all, but simply changed their posi- 
 tion, as ordered by General Wool. That when the Indiana regiment retreated, 
 he directed the other troops to change their position, and form what is called 
 in military phrase the refuse line, to prevent the out-flanking of his troops by 
 the enemy ; so that, if my information be right, General Lane was mistaken, 
 and there was really no retreat at all of these troops ; they merely took a new 
 position where they were ordered. 
 
 Again : General Lane, having presented the above extracts, says, "Here is 
 all that is said in relation to the conduct of the se(jpnd Indiana regiment in that 
 battle, either by General Taylor or myself." 
 
 This statement is incorrect. It is not all that General Lane says in relation 
 to the conduct of the second Indiana regiment in that battle. He says yet 
 more concerning them, and what he says further corroborates the report of 
 General Taylor, and the reports of General Wool and Color, el Davis. General 
 Lane does not again speak of it as a regiment, for it had ceased to be such oa 
 the field of battle ; but he speaks twice of the part of it which, under Colonel 
 Bowles, had joined the Mississippi rifle regiment, and fought bravely. This is 
 the "handful of men" named by General Taylor, the "fragment" named by 
 General Wool, the "small party of the second Indiana regiment" named by 
 Colonel Davis. The extract from General Lane's report as to them is as 
 follows ; ^ 
 
 " Al this critical juncture the Mississippi regiment, under the command of Colonel Davis, 
 arrived on the field, and, being joined by a part of the second Indiana, met the enemy in a most 
 gallant style, and after a severe and bloody engagement, repulsed lliem with great loss. In the 
 nnean time a large body of lancers, six or eight hundred in number, who had passed down 
 along the left towards our rear, made a most desperate charge upon the Arkansas and Ken- 
 tucky cavalry, with a view of cutting off and plundering the baggage train of the army, which 
 was at a rancJie near the battle-field. 
 
21 
 
 "This charge was met and resisted most gallantly by those cavalry, aided by about two hun- 
 dred infantry, who had taken refuge there after they had retired from the field. -This repulse 
 discouraged the enemy, and the Mississippi regiment and part of the second Indiana, being 
 joined by the third Indiana regiment, commanded by Colonel James H. Lane, now advanced 
 up towards the foot of the mountain, for the purpose of dislodging the enemy's force stationed 
 there. " 
 
 I now call the attention of the Senate to so much of the report of General 
 Wool as relates to the second Indiana regiment, by which it will be seen that 
 General Taylor's official report is fully sustained : 
 
 " In connexion with this movement, a heavy column of the enemy's infantry and cavalry and 
 battery on the side of the mountain moved against our left, which was held by Brigadier Gene- 
 ral Lane, with the second Indiana regiment, and Lieutenant O'Brien's section of artillery, by 
 whom the enemy's fire was warmly returned, and, owing to the range, with great effect, by 
 ■ Lieutenant O'Brien's artillery. General Lane, agreeably to my orders, wishing to bring his in- 
 fantry within striking distance, ordered his line to move forward. This order was duly obeyed 
 by Lieutenant O'Brien. The infantry, however, instead of advancing, retired in disorder, and 
 in spite of the utmost efiforts of their general and his officers, left the artillery unsupported, and 
 Jled the field of battle. Some of them were rallied by Colonel Bowles, who, with the fragment, fell in 
 the ranks of the Mississippi riflemen, and during the day did good service with that gallant regiment. 
 I deeply regret to say that most of them did not return to the field, and many of them continued their 
 flight to Saltillo.''' 
 
 I would suggest another inquiry, which seems to me to be of much import- 
 ance in the determination of this question of veracity. It will be seen, by 
 reference to the public document, that General Lane reported to General Wool, 
 his immediate commander, and that General Wool, after receiving that report, 
 made his report to General Taylor. It will be observed, too, that General 
 Wool was upon that part of the field in person, saw the retreat of the second 
 Indiana regiment, and assisted its officers in the attempt to rally them. "Some 
 of them," he says, "were rallied by Colonel Bowles;" he mentions none others 
 that rallied, and deeply regrets "to say that most of them did not return to the 
 field.'' This General Wool said with General Lane's report before him; and 
 not only so, General Lane was on the spot, and in oral as well as written com- 
 munication with General Wool. He was his next in rank, and it is reasonable 
 io presume that he was with him in his markee, aiding him to make up his 
 report, ahd no doubt read, at any rate might and ought to have read it, before 
 it was sent to General Taylor. He could not have been ignorant of its con- 
 tents, so far as it related to the troops under his command. If, then, General 
 Wool misunderstood his report, why did not General Lane correct it on the 
 spot, and cause a true report to reach General Taylor? Why, at least, was not 
 General Wool applied to to make the correction which General Lane desired ? 
 And why is not General Wool, instead of General Taylor, denounced by Gen- 
 eral Lane for making a false report ? If General Lane tells the truth, General 
 Wool's report is more injuriously false. General Lane says in his publication; 
 
22 
 
 ^^ There are two material facts known to every man upon that field, * * * ♦ 
 to wit, first, thai the second Indiana regiment immediately rallied; and next, 
 that they fought all day." General Wool says, in his report to General Tay- 
 lor : " I deeply regret to say that most of them did not return to the field, and 
 many of them continued their flight to Saltillo.^^ Now, if General Lane's pub- 
 lication be not a monstrous perversion of the truth, how happened he to let 
 this report of General Wool go to General Taylor without correction? And 
 how happens it that he has never yet called on General Wool for a correction, 
 never attacked General Wool's statement, but General Taylor's only, which 
 he well knows to be founded on General Wool's ? I can tell you, sir. Gene- 
 ral Wool was a Democrat, General Taylor a Whig, and a candidate for the 
 Presidency. 
 
 I will now present to the Senate the report of Colonel Davis, and would re-, 
 fer, in connexion with it, to the remarks made by him in the Senate yesterday, 
 which also bear strongly on the pending question : 
 
 " As we approached the scene of action, horsemen, recognised as our troops, were seen run- 
 ning dispersed and confusedly from the iield. And our first view of the hne of battle presented 
 the mortifying spectacle of a regiment of infantry flying disorganized from before the enemy. 
 These sights, so well calculated to destroy confidence and dispirit the troops just coming into 
 action, it is my pride and pleasure to believe only nerved the resolution of the regiment I have 
 the honor to command." *»=«*« 
 
 " With a few honorable exceptions the appeal was unheeded, as were the ofiers which I am 
 informed were made by our men to give their canteens of water to those who complained of 
 thirst, on condition that they would go back. General Wool was upon the ground, making 
 great efforts to rally the men who had given way. 
 
 •' It may be proper for me to notice the fact that early in the action Colonel Bowles, of In- 
 diana, with a small party from his regiment, which he stated was all of his men that he could 
 rally, joined us, and expressed a wish to serve with my command. He remained with us 
 throughout the day, and, under all the circumstance.s, displayed much personal gallantry." 
 
 The following is an extract from the report of Colonel Marshall : 
 
 "' I was closely observing the movements on the mountain, perceiving that matters were 
 reaching extremes with my riflemen, when I observed that a regiment of Americans loere retreat- 
 xixg on my r^hl'^ 
 
 This is the last we hear, by any official report, of the second Indiana regi- 
 ment on the field of battle, and all their official papers leave the mass of the 
 regiment in full retreat. Can any man read these extracts from the reports of 
 the officers commanding on the spot, and believe that they were all mistaken 
 in such an important particular ? Is it to be credited that the second Indiana 
 regiment, or one hundred and fifty men of that regiment, could have joined 
 the Mississippi rifle regiment, and yet Colonel Davis not know it even to this 
 day ? But suppose they did return, and no one knew it except General Lane, 
 ■who did not think it worth while to report the fact, how was General Taylor to 
 know it ? In truth, Mr. President, the pretence is too absurd to be argued 
 
23 
 
 seriously. And worse than ridiculous was the attempt of Gen. Lane to get 
 supplemental report from General Taylor, founded on a newspaper publica- 
 tion, contradicting the mass of consistent official evidence which I have refer- 
 red to. 
 
 Gen. Taylor did not charge these men with cowardice, as Gen. Lane asserts 
 in his publication; but, on the contrary, declared he had not lost confidence in 
 them, and that he intended to give them a prominent place in the action next 
 day, if the enemy rallied. He viewed their conduct with the eye of an exp - 
 rienced and sagacious General, who had seen much and read much, and who 
 knew that such reverses occur among the bravest veterans, without any one 
 being able to perceive an adequate cause. From the very earliest historic re- 
 cords of the operations of armies, we read of such things frequently among 
 troops, acknowledged to be the bravest and the best. The Greeks and Ro- 
 mans believed it to be the work of their rural deity, Pan, the god of the woods 
 and the fields; hence the word panic. But there is reason enough for the 
 flight of these men to be shown from the transactions of the day. Their offi- 
 cers were quarrelling among them.selves, and the most common instinct of self- 
 preservation would teach the men that their lives were in danger of being sac- 
 rificed by the feuds of their officers. Such appears to have been the case from 
 what occurred on the field. Gen. Lane ordered Lieut. O'Brien to move his 
 battery forward; but it comes out at last that he did not inform Col. Bowles of 
 this order, or send any order to him; that he merely ^'•intended^'' Col. Bowles 
 should advance. The consequence was, that when Lieut. O'Brien's battery 
 began to move, neither officers nor men of the second Indiana regiment knew 
 where it was going — they were under a terrible fire, and had aright to suppose 
 the battery was about to be withdrawn from their support. If the men retreat- 
 ed under these circumstances. Gen. Taylor ought not to have lost confidence 
 in ihem, as it appears he did not. But these officers either lost confidence, or 
 never had confidence, in each other. Col. BomIcs, when he rallied his ^^hand- 
 ful ofmen,^^ did not join Gen. Lane, but Col. Davis, in whom he and his men 
 had confidence. And Gen. Lane, long after the battle, accuses Col. Bowles 
 of hiding himself in a ravine. If the men knew the state of feeling among 
 their officers, the wonder is, not that they fought no longer, but that they fought 
 at all under their command. 
 
 Gen. Lane's publication is now disposed of — disproved in all its injurious 
 parts by official documents. I apprehend no attempt to sustain his statements. 
 They are utterly indefensible in form and fact. And having established the 
 two propositions with which I set out, namely : 1st. That Gen. Lane made a 
 publication impeaching the veracity of Gen. Taylor; and, 2d, that his publica- 
 tion was false, we have a right to claim the admission of the Senator from In- 
 diana, (Mr. Bright,) that " he ought to have been removed." Every body 
 
24 
 
 must be satisfied with the evidence; and Gen. Lane himself must be convinced, 
 for his friends here have forced us to force the conviction upon him, that his 
 attempt to blast the honorable reputation of his brave and generous commander 
 has proved worse than futile 
 
 I would be glad, Mr. President, if it were in my power, to anticipate the 
 apology which gentlemen will offer for this man and this publication. I know 
 of none. I have endeavored to look at it on all sides, to see what weak points 
 there may be in my position, but here I can find none — no mitigation, no apol- 
 ogy for this most detestable and black-hearted calumny. Gentlemen on the 
 other side must endure it, if they endure it at all — must excuse it, if they ex- 
 cuse it all — upon only one consideration, and that is, that Gen. Lane was fight- 
 ing on their side in a fierce political contest, and that this was one of their 
 usual weapons of party warfare; that he drew it from the party armory, and 
 wielded it, as far as he was able, with effect. If the shaft fell harmless at the 
 feet of the intended victim, it was not the fault of Gen. Lane; he discharged 
 it with all his force, and the point was well tipped with venom. Let this, 
 then, excuse him, as far as it may, with his own political friends; with us he 
 Cc.n have no apology. No words can be too strong to convey the just abhor- 
 rence of his detestable falsehood and ingratitude. But I have done with him. 
 
 I felt great reluctance to touch this question at all, as it necessarily involves 
 the consideration of individual character and conduct. But I may say, in ac- 
 cordance with the remarks made by the Senator from North Carolina yesterday, 
 that, if this resolution had passed, calling for the causes of removals, and if 
 Gen. Taylor had answered it, he would have given causes for the removals in 
 the leading cases, such as we have been discussing, entirely satisfactory to the 
 minds of all candid men. I do not suppose he would have given reasons in 
 every case, for it would necessarily have occupied much time, involved much 
 expense, and resulted in no practical benefit to the country. The subject of 
 the resolutions were, I believe, little thought of, certainly but little spoken of 
 by him, for he well believed, as did every body else, that there was no serious 
 purpose to pass them. But, had they passed, and had they been answered, it 
 would have been found that Gen. Lane, though one of the most unscrupulous, 
 was not one of the ablest of those engaged in this species of warfare. There 
 were older and better soldiers in the field than he; more matured and better 
 disciplined in these peculiar tactics; trained to the destruction of personal 
 character, as the Thugs of India are trained to the destruction of individual 
 life. Gen. Lane in this was like the classic Bardolph in a kindred department 
 of the fine arts — ''he was too open;" "like an unskilful singer, he kept no 
 time" or measure; he had valor, but no discretion. But there were others 
 who managed the business better — old, experienced manufacturers of libels, 
 who worked them off" to order, and furnished any kind or quantity for their 
 
26 
 
 country customers; and generally, not always, the public offices of the United 
 States, in the various sections of the Union, were the branches of issue from 
 which this false currency was put in circulation. 
 
 During the last canvass, and during the existence of Gen. Taylor's adminis- 
 tration, slander and defamation, which had been before habitual but measured 
 in their terms, assumed a character of peculiar violence and ferocity. It is no 
 wonder; Gen. Taylor was deeply intrenched in the hearts and affections of the 
 people, and must be dislodged. His character was bold, marked, and decisive, 
 such as commands the admiration of friends and alarms the fears and excites 
 the hatred of enemies. It must therefore be depreciated and destroyed. 
 Hence the full flood-tide of party fury was let loose at once upon him and his 
 administration. It is no wonder; the waves dash tiercely against the bold 
 promontory which breasts the deep sea, while they roll smoothly over the 
 sloping beach, and sink to sleep upon its sands. 
 
 I do not say that every officeholder who was removed pla«ed himself in the 
 same situatiori with Gen. Lane, either in class or degree. Many, however, 
 fall within the same class. There were those who manufactured the false cur- 
 rency, and those who gave it circulation knowing it to be false, or who were 
 reckless of its truth or falsehood. Generally each one who could say or write 
 an offensive or insulting thing, said or wrote it according to his capacity; and 
 those who could do neither, attended to the distribution of the libels newly 
 made and placed in their hands. Some were the presiding officers of political 
 meetings, or the movers of insulting resolutions. Indeed the officeholders 
 formed throughout the United States an organized electioneering corps, paid 
 out of the public Treasury. Talk of proscription in removing from office under 
 circumstances like these! Why, Gen. Taylor, if he respected himself, if he 
 regarded his friends who had staked so much upon his fair fame, could hold 
 neither official nor social intercourse with men whose daily business was thus 
 to slander and vilify him. 
 
 It is of course impossible to classify all the cases, and refer them in general 
 terms to their several causes; but I do not know or believe that there was a 
 single removal without evidence to establish a cause or causes, such as I have 
 named, or some other equally cogent. 
 
 All the cases in which no sufficient reason could be made out. Gen. Taylor 
 uniformly refused to remove. The Senators from Iowa will recognise one 
 marked case in their State — that of an officer with more patronage in Iowa and 
 Wisconsin than all the rest combined, whom he absolutely refused to remove, 
 much to the dissatisfaction of his friends in that section of the country, because 
 they could not bring home to the officer any abuse of his official station. 
 Whether he committed any or not, I do not know. It was not proved that he 
 did, and Gen. Taylor would not remove him. 
 
26 
 
 The charge of proscription made against the administration uf Gen. Taylor is 
 therefore a false charge. He never did carry out the Democratic doctrine of 
 removal from offi.ce for opinion's sake. 
 
 The Senator from Iowa is right in the heavy and indignant censure which he 
 passes upon the man or men, whosoever he was, or whosoever they were, who 
 taught the doctrine *'to the victors belong the spoils," and brought its evils 
 upon our country. I agree with him in principle; I urged it here in my place 
 many years ago, not in the same choice figures and phrases, for they had not 
 yet found their way into the Senate chamber. But to these I do not object; it 
 were idle to dispute about tastes since we agree in principle, and it is gratifying 
 to find that that is the case. The point which he maintains I maintain. It re- 
 quires but a change of phrase, and a change of names, to make our concurrence 
 complete. In the abstract proposition we agree exactly — namely, that those 
 who brought this evil upon our country owe a heavy responsibility to the nation 
 and to posterity. The Senator from Michigan (Mr. Cass,) does not touch this 
 question. He is too wise; has lived too long, and the past is too fresh in his 
 memory. He rests satisfied with stoutly maintaining his point, from which 
 there is no danger of his being driven, as it lies far out of the range of my 
 argument. 
 
 The answer to the resolutions, as amended by the Senator from Kentucky, 
 carrying the inquiry back to 1825, will show those of us who do not remember, 
 who it was that planted the tree from which you now reap such bitter fruit. In 
 the canvass of 1824 there were four candidates for the Presidency. Neither of 
 them was elected by the people, and Mr. Adams came in by a vote of the 
 House of Representatives. Much more than half the people, and, as I well 
 believe, more than half the officeholders in the United States, opposed his elec- 
 tion. When he became President, did he remove any one from office because 
 he opposed him? Not a man! • In the terrible contest of 1828, a very large 
 proportion of the officeholders, probably a full half, opposed the re-election of 
 Mr. Adams, and supported the rival candidate; even for this, as far as I can 
 ascertain from the records of the times, he did not remove a man! In his 
 whole four years there were but four removals which involved the action of 
 the Senate. 
 
 Then, until the commencement of Gen. Jackson's Administration, in 1829, 
 there had been no proscription ; there were no wrongs to be righted — no inju- 
 ries to be avenged. The fierce passions of men had not yet become enlisted 
 in these contests, and justice did not require the interposition of the avenger. 
 But in 1829 the full blown mischief burst suddenly upon us in all its intensity. 
 The Government was likened to a city taken by storm, and delivered over to 
 pillage. The detestable doctrine, <'/o the victors belong the spoils,^^ was 
 openly avowed, and, as far as my knowledge extended, was fully and effective- 
 
2T 
 
 ly acted on. The policy and puipooe of the triumphant party was promulgated 
 throuo-h the country by words and signs. It was a general sweep of all the offi- 
 cers. In 1666 the Dutch Admiral De Ruyter sailed with a broom at his mast- 
 head, and over his flag, to show that he intended to sweep the British navy 
 and commerce from the ocean. So for years over our whole broad land the 
 broom appeared at the top of each hickory pole over the flag of the Union — a 
 pregnant sign, indicative of the feeling industriously excited and sedulously 
 cherished. The admonition of the mad Timon to Alcibiades, 
 " Let not thy sword skip one," 
 
 was universally and unconditionally regarded. There was large destruction of 
 the just hopes of men and the dependence of families. 
 
 Before 1829 there were contests for office — there was victory and there was 
 defeat — but they touched the higher objects of ambition only ; the love of dis- 
 tinction and power, not the living of the official drudge, the wages of whose labor 
 was the support of his family. But at that time the appropriation of the spoils, 
 a term descriptive as it was new and alarming, included every thing. I re- 
 member w^ell the opening of the fearful drama, and the sad impressions which 
 rested on ray mind in witnessing its then present, and looking to its future, 
 consequences. I felt that it was the origin of stupendous evils to my country, 
 and looked upon it as I would have looked upon a plague-spot on the breast of 
 a venerated parent. And it was- a new era in our history, when a malignant 
 poison was infused into the bod}' politic which no physician has yet been found 
 potent to eradicate. The poisoned arrow is still there, and can be effectually 
 extracted by those only who infixed it. But from that quarter there is at pre- 
 sent but little hope. Do I err in supposing that, give you power, or let you 
 seize power this day, the proscription of past years would be at once renewed 
 in all its intensity ? I may be mistaken, and hope I am. If these resolutions 
 were offered and speeches upon them made in sincerity and truth, with a view 
 to put down a vicious and false principle of action, and not merely to avert 
 public indignation from the real authors of the mischief, and point it against 
 others, a change is indeed going on where it may produce the happiest effects. 
 From 1829, year after year, argument was exhausted on this subject, but it 
 was felt to be idle. We talked to the whirlwind, to the tornado. You were 
 deaf as the sea and blind as its rocks. Mow your ears and eyes are opened, 
 and your tongues unloosed. The prospects of reform are therefore brighten- 
 ing. Our Democratic brethren begin to see, and I trust that time and close 
 observation will show them more distinctly, the practical working of their own 
 favorite system ; and practical lessons can alone convince them of the mon- 
 strous abuse which they have originated and continued. Mercury himself,, 
 though the god of eloquence, could not by mere language have impressed the 
 Gorgon with a perception of her horrors ; but she saw them reflected by the 
 
28 
 
 shield of Perseus, and, like her beholders, was turned to stone. And if Gen. 
 Taylor did all he has been accused of doing in the way of proscription — if he 
 removed merely for opinion's sake — he only held up the shield, which, by a 
 faint reflection, has shown to modern Democracy the coil of snakes in her own 
 locks. But he did not this. It was characteristic of that excellent man — gener- 
 ous and kind as he was brave — that he often forgot his own wrongs and those 
 of his friends, in sympathy for the afflictions of his enemies and detractors. 
 He did not, but I do not say that he ought not to have meted to you the same 
 measure which you gave to others when the power was yours. Now, we all 
 know that for twenty years, from 1829 to 1849, with the exception of a few 
 short months, the Whigs, composing one-half the nation, equal certainly to the 
 other half in intelligence, in patriotism, in devotion to our glorious Union, and 
 in capacity to serve it, were proscribed for opinion's sake, and denied to that 
 extent the political rights of American citizens. No matter how great his 
 capacity, how high his favor, or how urgent his necessities, the disqualification 
 was absolute of every Whig, and even of every Democrat who would not avow 
 himself such according to the newest platform. All right to office, or hope of 
 office, was denied to those who would not swear — not exactl)^ to the thirty- 
 nine articles — but to the resolutions of the last nominating convention, or to 
 the last exposition of political opinion by the successful candidate. If the 
 Democracy had prevailed in the election o^ 1848, the test of competency 
 would have been the newest exposition of the Nicholson letter. 
 
 Amid all their mutations in other particulars, in this one article of their po- 
 litical faith — the doctrine of the "spoils^' — the Democracy never changed or 
 wavered so long as they held the power. They were fixed in their opinions, 
 firm in their purpose, and stern in its execution; their march was always on- 
 ward — 
 
 "Like to the Pontic sea, 
 Whose icy current and compulsive course, 
 Knows no retiring ebb," 
 
 without change in their object or faltering in its pursuit. 
 
 But in 1849 the scene was changed. The proscribed party, the glorious 
 Whig party, who for twenty long years had borne, but never bowed, to the in- 
 solence of power, triumphed, and the man of their choice was in the Presiden- 
 tial chair. Now, in this state of things, if the case presented by the mover of 
 these resolutions had in fact occurred; if all the Democrats in office had been 
 removed, and Whigs appointed in their stead, what right would you have to 
 complain? It were but "even handed justice," which "commends the ingre- 
 dients of your poisoned chalice to your own lips." And the wailing and accu- 
 sations of the party, now they have lost some of the spoils, appear to me as 
 mean-spirited as false. When in the full possession of power, they were 
 
29 
 
 •' Lion-mettled, bold, and took no care 
 Who chafed.'" 
 
 This change of bearing under a reverse of fortune indicates a want of con- 
 sistency in qualities, a feebleness of temper seldom found among men whose 
 trade is spoliation, or among the predatory part of the animal world. The 
 stern to inflict are generally firm to endure. If the offices be spoils, as demo- 
 cratic language and usages have pronounced them, and we spoil the spoilers, 
 they should meet their reverse like men, and not ask us and ask the nation to 
 weep with them because the spoils which they seized are rent from them in 
 their turn. 
 
 The Senator from Indiana (Mr. Bright) "wears his rue with a difference." 
 His distress arises from the alleged fact that Gen. Taylor gave pledges and has 
 violated them. Pledges to whom? To those men whose merits we have been 
 discussing, or to them and their fellow laborers in the work of defamation? To 
 the twenty or thirty thousand office holders organized as an electioneering 
 corps, of whom, sad to tell! three or four thousand most active, most capable, 
 and most vociferous gentlemen were removed the very first year of Gen. Tay- 
 lor's Administration — cut off in the midst of their patriotic labors, while ear- 
 nestly engaged in the diffusion of this species of useful knowledge? If it were 
 true that Gen. Taylor made such pledges to them, was there any corresponding 
 equivalent on their part, making a pact which was binding either in morals or 
 in law? Would they or could they have defamed him more, uttered more or 
 baser falsehoods against him, if they had been told expressly that every man 
 of them was to be turned out on the day that Gen. Taylor should take his oath 
 of office at the Capitol? But the case pretended does not exist. He turned no 
 man out of office who was protected by the terms of any pledge which he ever 
 made. The complaint is therefore as unfounded as it is pitiful. 
 
 But the party who have brought this great evil on the country, and who now 
 feel and seem to deplore it, can apply the remedy, if they ever regain power, 
 as they probably will at some future day, which I trust in God will be far dis- 
 tant ! When in the tide of time that day shall come, if it ever do come, say 
 at the end of another cycle of twenty years; when the Whigs shall have in- 
 demnified themselves fully by the enjoyment of official honor and official emol- 
 ument in their turn for twenty years; and when you shall have drunk to its 
 dregs the bitter cup which you so long held to their lips; then, when 
 
 " The wheel is come full circle," 
 
 and you are again in power, remember to retain the abhorrence which you now 
 feel for '■^proscription;^'' forget your ancient love of place and power; forego, 
 once for all, the spoils of victory, and join with the Senator from North Caro- 
 lina; and in that state of things the whole Whig party will join with him and 
 
30 
 
 you, and form one great Union party — a party which will abhor detraction, 
 which will detest the libeller and slanderer, and the members of which shall 
 spurn offices, or hold them only because the people have need of their services 
 — a party which shall consider men as nothing, the Union as every thing. 
 When the Democracy shall bring into power a temper and a purpose such as 
 this, then, and not till then, w^ill the evil which they have brought upon the 
 nation be removed. 
 

 
 S^C ^C CMC 
 
 re ccjc r 
 
 -tec- c ^ <- CC' c Cfd -ccc 
 
 OCc ■(■C'CcrccCcrC « 
 ^ c <<?c. <^ (Ctj . CT ^ 
 
 :c ^ cccc^' 
 
 «j^sc 
 
 M CXX: C<8C:C ccct^ 
 . cc CCC ^^c cCCv 
 
 ' « <Xt CSCA CCc 
 
 .CC(^ CCC^CCLC, C< 
 
 - c^cxcc ^c<ir c c< 
 . c<c ccc ^c:^^ c c 
 : cccc dec 
 : ctcc ccc 
 
 <cccrc 
 
 cc ^^ c <f «: ciT'-c cc c ^ 
 
 CC <€Kr c cr CT ^cc ccc^cmcc < 
 ^ e ccc: c<rciccc<K<5 — 
 
 : -^C cc XSeCeO^Ci 
 
 ^' c cc ^rc<^ccgxc«:( 
 : c.c_ c c cfccc" cc^ccccci. 
 
 t cc cc <3xc:c<^R9cc 
 
 :/ c<: €c ^raccc ^ c<cc «< 
 
 r r C CLOC 
 
 C<L.<rc 
 
 CCCC- 
 CCfC 
 CCS 
 
 ccs^ 
 
 -aCc^^^SSS 
 
 ^cCCC'^C %< 
 
 :<cc:'c(cccc 
 
 <CC 
 
 icecccc < 
 
 r .<c:c ^ccc ' - ' 
 ^c: cecccc^ 
 
 «<: cc c. <xjcc: c . ■ ,^ 
 t^c <^ c ccc<::c\ c 
 
 mCL <a C Ctic^ ccc 
 
 • <rcr c& c -ccccr c ' < c 
 
 ^^' <ric<x:ccc >.c-c 
 ^^-^ccxrcc c'kc 
 
 ^C <SCC<5tdCC:<C 
 ^^ CcCCcCC.ic^C 
 oc cc <iCOC-C^^C c 
 ^C C' i« <cj«rcC- c ' .<& . c 
 
 c<^c^c:cc<cicccc 
 <x^'<: ^c<:ccc<c 
 
 <c?^:c<ci 
 
 cc ^.^ 
 
 cc-c: 
 
 cc c:c ' 
 
 .^c 
 
 SCCC 
 
 cccr dc cc 
 
 cc c^ 
 
 cc c«^ 
 
 ' C c <3:<rc «jC .CcCC 
 
 lccc^EC^^c<< 
 
 r<c c:c<rc, < <t<: 
 
 :c:c" ccc c cc ^ 
 _ ^ cc 
 
 jc c ^cc C ^< 
 ■^CC cCC C CC' 
 
 cc C.XC SH 
 KC cere ccc 
 icc ccic ccc 
 
 v-^ ^-17 C - ccc 
 
 -J"C_ ccc < 
 
 ^cc oc:c ccvo^. 
 ^^K c:<s2._c ccc^ 
 
 r cC C_^c <^ / C ^^<^: 
 vCC CC-KX^Cc-c^ 
 - ^< C^CC^<I-i~CC3^- 
 ^ cicc c <cc <:r h <i^^- 
 
 ■ cc cccc <zj^(^s::%. 
 " cc '<X X5C 
 [ICC ccCC. 
 rcc(xc" cc%. 
 
 cicc 
 ccc 
 ccc 
 
 ccc 
 ccc 
 
 ■^cc< 
 ex 
 
««Lc c: ccc ^, 
 
 ^v c <ict 
 dec <3^<XC2C C -, 
 
 -^ ore <j^OiC_Cccc CJ 
 
 c;c<<-'* ^KlC^-CX- 
 
 C 
 
 C <3 
 
 
 CC <M<^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^'c.c-cj^.:<:.-CiC ^^^ 
 
 rcc^cc 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 - ^^ -^-k c a?f^ c > <.cc cscc- 
 ^ - - ^<'<r^^ c Cv .c c < /rc cc^/jpf 
 
 ^C" CCOC C:C r c iC: 
 
 ^ccc<<rcc( cco 
 
 Zc<::cce^ Ccc c -- 
 
 CCCCC CCC CC:X. 
 Greece oc c ■.■>c,csi<-'<:c 
 ^CcCC C Ccx C c c< 
 
 
 ccc:c 
 
 ccoc 
 
 <ac 
 
 CCCC! 
 CCcCj 
 
 CCCCO 
 cOLC' 
 
 XCCJEJ 
 
 ccc-:^:- 
 
 :cCC«C'- 
 
 'ccc^<SC' 
 
 cc'74rc' 
 
 Xc«CC< 
 
 CCC<'4^C ' 
 
 c cc C^ 
 
 Cc C V,. C 
 
 c ^ < ox 
 
 CI . C C X 
 c c c X 
 
 c r <: X 
 
 r <- c CCCC 
 C c ccC 
 
 C C C^c^ 
 
 c c CcO 
 
 < • c-<: 
 
 c«L 
 cc 
 
 LC<1 
 CC 
 CC 
 
 CC 
 
 <C c 
 
 :cc c 
 
 <:.4cc: <:_<i<rc c 
 
 KKr€: c: 4Ccc c 
 
 c C(<: c^ 
 
 c e c 
 
 c cc <«ei o 
 
 <rcc^ o 
 
 cccxi <z 
 
 c cc «^^ 
 
 < CcCCX 
 
 ^ CcCCc AL< 
 
 < Cc<''<re.< 
 
 C ca:<^<: < 
 
 -C exec Ml 
 
 c'^Scc<r 
 
 . C':-.C-<C1C:CC 
 ^ cc^ c^c:c:<rc 
 
 C <JC c ^C CiCCC c^l «« 
 
 "c^c:^ «cc c^cxc^ c^ 
 
 '■ ^--^ € •^■cX Ccccc ^" <^c< 
 
 'CC c vxc 'X:^^ ' ^^'^^ 
 
 "CC C<;- ^<iCC -ccc- ■ ^|C ^'C<